Brooksie359

I think the point I am trying to make is that if displayport can support 4k 240hz then that means if you have 3 displayport connections on your card then they should be able to all run at 4k 240hz. You are dividing the amount of information one displayport can transfer by 3 or 4 for no reason. Sure if it was all running from one displayport connection then you would divide but 3 separate displayports mean you have 3 separate connections that support 4k 240hz.

I am super confused. You are not running these from the same displayport connections so why are you treating it like they share bandwidth?

Forcing apple to change the way they design their os isn't more choices it is just using the EU to make IOS more similar to Android. Even if I grant you that it is more choices that doesn't mean it is good. Choices means you have to make decisions and sometimes not having to make decisions is nice for alot of people and there are even studies that say if you do have to make decisions that too many choices makes people less confident and/or happy about their decisions. So more choices doesn't even mean it is better.

I would argue the opposite. Your average apple user likely doesn't care or would prefer to not have 3rd party app stores on their phone and it is only a small minority that wants this so you are basically forcing a change in the intended apple experience for the satisfaction of the few who care.

You completely missed the point. The people I am talking about don't need to be told but want to be told which is sorta the point. They prefer the streamline experience that Apple products have and the extra app store adds complexity for obvious reasons. You might think it wouldn't be confusing but to some it would.

I would imagine most will still use the app store but I also think some might get confused by the option. I have family members who got confused by android due to different options including stuff like alternative app stores. I guess if Apple makes it super hard to get to the option so only those who really want it will see it then it might not be adding confusion and complexity.

The option of other app stores adds complexity and makes it no longer the same walled garden. Granted hopefully apple makes sure people can't install their party app stores that are insecure.

I wouldn't consider this more choice necessarily. I mean part of the appeal of Apple was its simplicity and its walled garden and now that is not longer an option with this change.

I am a bit surprised that they lowered their rates as even if they do have competition I expect it would have a significant effect on their business as most people will still decide to use the apple store. I mean doesn't Google still take something similar to what Apple use to take even though there are plenty of alternative android app stores?

For me I own the mx50 and HD600 mostly because I wanted on open back and one closed back and those two were highly recommended. Both are great for music but I still prefer the hyper x for gaming. Just plain easier to hear where people are coming from in hyper x. Also it isn't like the mx50 and HD600 blow it out of the water in terms of sound in games as I don't notice much of a difference compared to the difference when listening to music. Also the hyper x is actually pretty decent even when listening to music considering its price and that it is a gaming headset. Not audiophile level but world's better than some of the other gaming headphones I have owned which are horrible for similar price.

Yeah gpu would be a significant uplift in some of those games.

Yeah I am not sure what you are talking about. I have tried using audiophile headphones for games and they are just worse in terms of being able to hear direction in my experience. It's why I switched back to using the hyperx for gaming and mainly use the other headphones for music.

I have used them for years and they have been very good in the games I play. Are you sure it isn't just the games fault rather than the headphones?

Yeah honestly I love the sound quality you get on hyperx cloud II with the option for surround sound for hearing footsteps if you need it. Honestly I have a few pretty good headphones that are better for listening to music but prefer the hyper x for gaming 99% of the time.

Price can be accounted for but for some it isn't really a factor. If you are mostly concerned about performance then the price might not matter too much if you can easily afford the high cost of a 4090.

I think this gen of cards are actually really good if you don't take price into account. The 4090 is a crazy fast card compared to last generation even if the price is pretty crazy.

Personally I think having subscriptions as an option is good. I still think owning games should always be an option but subscription services is a nice option sorta like how video subscription services is also a pretty good option for alot of people. I do think subscription services is super nice for games you only plan to play once and then be done with it.

That is completely out of context quote and not that I don't dislike ubisofts actions but people make it out like he is saying something he is not. If I remember correctly that quote is in context of what is holding back people from adopting subscriptions based services like Microsoft game pass, EA play and ubisoft+. It was never meant to be a statement saying gamers should be ok with not owning games as he even said how he understands the sentiment as someone who likes owning movies rather than subscription based video services. I think the gist of what was said is that subscription based services are a very good alternative that some might prefer or should consider as they have their own unique value which I think he has a point as game pass is pretty cool for those who it makes sense for. All of that said it was incredibly ironic when he stated that people shouldn't be afraid of losing access to a game services just because you don't own the game when his company has basically done that for games people do own so maybe he does have a point because you lose access regardless.

Yeah I would do the jump to a new platform for sure especially because you won't be keeping your current ram configuration anyways. As for best option I guess it depends on what you are after. Personally I would go for ryzen due to liking their high end cpus more than Intel mostly due to power and heat rather than pure raw performance.

The changing a message to formal from casual seems a bit interesting. I think most would only use that as a starting point because I can't imagine trusting AI to edit a message you are sending to your boss.

I am confused why anyone would sell a system for that cheap. I would be suspicious if a deal looks too good to be true honestly.

Yeah that means one of the components is out of stock but they usually come back in stock at some point.

For me generally the reason why you would choose the cheaper cpu platform is if that allows you to get a key upgrade in say the gpu and the overall performance of the computer would be higher as a result. I mean if I could go from a 4060 to a 4070 by going with a less expensive platform like AM4 then I would likely do so. If I have the budget and the money saved wouldn't go anywhere then I probably would go AM5. I mean AM5 has a good boost in performance over AM4 and has more features. Also upgrade path is also cool if you actually end up using it.

Just up some settings and then no more cpu bottleneck. Problem solved. Unless you are getting bad performance in game I wouldn't worry about such a minor bottleneck.

I have my monitor at 200% scale for 4k because I like the size. Granted I have a 27 inch monitor so the pixel density is pretty high and at 27 inch 200% scaling looks pretty good. Basically what it would looked like if I had a 27 inch 1080p monitor but I still get the advantages of 4k when watching 4k content and play games in 4k. Granted most 4k content has DRM so mostly just youtube but then again that is what I mostly watch anyways.